I got severely outplayed by the AI and it blew my mind

Currently Viewing (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Blood Gryphon

Knight at Arms
WBVC
Best answers
1
If you do what I mentioned in the second part of my comment, then you should increase the chance of experiencing it, but a lot of times the enemy simply abandons the siege or peace agreement ends the war. Gotta love short wars...
Best way to ensure getting to defend is joining once the battle starts. Yes you have to sacrifice some troops but it is still worth it considering you get to save the castle and actually play defense.
 

PSD

Recruit
Best answers
0
If you do what I mentioned in the second part of my comment, then you should increase the chance of experiencing it, but a lot of times the enemy simply abandons the siege or peace agreement ends the war. Gotta love short wars...
no i will not cuz of stupid ai win chances calculating, like i said b4. they fear of me, fear of my full t6 soldiers and will attack my castles only when im outside
 

NamFlow

Sergeant at Arms
WBVC
Best answers
0
Best way to ensure getting to defend is joining once the battle starts. Yes you have to sacrifice some troops but it is still worth it considering you get to save the castle and actually play defense.
That's also an option, yeah :wink: to just wait outside the castle and then rush in to help.


no i will not cuz of stupid ai win chances calculating, like i said b4. they fear of me, fear of my full t6 soldiers and will attack my castles only when im outside
"..fear of my full t6 soldiers"

I mean I would also stop besieging your castle if I knew that I would be fighting against army full of t6 troops defending it :grin: unless I had the same or higher number of T6 troops.
 

babelfisch

Sergeant
Best answers
0
ye this is what i hate in this game the most. stupid ai win chances calculating
Obviously they need to calculate win chances somehow. Personally I believe they should add some randomness. Currently it's like 'if enemy force is 15% stronger, don't attack' (don't quote me on the number!). Instead it should be 'if enemy force is 15% stronger, there is a 30% chance that we attack anyway / if enemy force is 30% stronger there is a 5% chance to attack anyway.' (again, don't quote me on the numbers!). This could be further influenced by perks and traits.
 

PSD

Recruit
Best answers
0
Obviously they need to calculate win chances somehow. Personally I believe they should add some randomness. Currently it's like 'if enemy force is 15% stronger, don't attack' (don't quote me on the number!). Instead it should be 'if enemy force is 15% stronger, there is a 30% chance that we attack anyway / if enemy force is 30% stronger there is a 5% chance to attack anyway.' (again, don't quote me on the numbers!). This could be further influenced by perks and traits.
shud be like dat: me, unqid tha king of aserai, my army count 700 ppl and i will not runaway like a wuss from this 200 ppl non army party
 

AnandaShanti

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
The ai is responding to you reinforcing the garrison so when you leave it "sees" it as a softer target when you go inside it "sees" it as much harder and goes to Ortysia. As the 2nd poster said you can abuse this if you want til they run out of steam. I personally try not to do such things but players will always try to game the system.
Yeah but that's what they get for trying to run the player out :p Although they're not really as others said, they just go after easy and aren't compelled to ever be committed to a siege. I don't like to fight in siege map anyways so I'd rather intercept them. After make kingdom policies I can just massacre an AI army with my 300+ t6 party.

Now fallowing a neutral AI army and buy all the food at their destination and getting them starved and kidnaped by bandits, that's just plain fun :smile:
 

froggyluv

Master Knight
NW
Best answers
0
Obviously they need to calculate win chances somehow. Personally I believe they should add some randomness. Currently it's like 'if enemy force is 15% stronger, don't attack' (don't quote me on the number!). Instead it should be 'if enemy force is 15% stronger, there is a 30% chance that we attack anyway / if enemy force is 30% stronger there is a 5% chance to attack anyway.' (again, don't quote me on the numbers!). This could be further influenced by perks and traits.
Yeah def need more than just a simple math formula as thats boring. We need more "King of Aserai is sieging Sargoth with his 100 men vs 800 men because he's feelin hormonal"
 
Best answers
0
Honestly it's kind of glitchy and it can be abused. The A.I. should change target to neither of the two after a while. There needs to be more chance. I've run back and forth from fief to fief to get armies to starve or lose cohesion as well. They would just go for one and then for the other, and I bought out all the food from nearby towns. You can beat armies 4x your size or more with this tactic.
Clearly this an unintended feature, in other words an exploit. Fortunately, there are some ways to fix that, one of them is by “simply” changing the values to make the AI making more aggressive and decided rather than passively walking around until they lose cohesion. Also, by improving the AI in sieges would negate the player to have such an impact on the outcome. Another way is to divide the forces of the AI into two, of the 1100, let’s say 300 goes sieging the castle 1 and the other 800 goes for the castle 2. Now that 300 should be faster than the player because he (the player) will try to stop him, this way you can bait the player and avoid battle. If the player goes for the bait, the 800 army goes for castle 2 and starts the siege, then if the player notices it, he will be running like a fool to castle 2, now do you choose to lose men by entering or do you watch your castle fall. Meanwhile, the 300 army is harassing other AI forces (because he fast), or goes for castle 1, or goes and helps 800 army, or goes help some other AI force. Even if the player goes for the 800 army first, he can’t do anything – he will get trapped on castle 2 when the AI sieges, then 300 goes and sieges castle 1, then the 800 army either stops the siege and helps conquer castle 1, or sends like another 150 good men to castle 1, or continues the siege and traps the player meanwhile 300 fast army is harassing other forces… This is the ultimate play.
 

Dionaea

Veteran
Best answers
0
Yeah, I utilize this tactic when large forces threaten to overwhelm. I wouldn't say you were outplayed... More like: you neglected to take into account how the AI works. The AI always targets the most vulnerable settlement of their adversaries. Distance may play a roll, but as AI routinely goes deep into enemy territory to take weak castles, I'm not sure how much distance plays a part in their targeting.

There isn't some grand strategy at work here that "outplayed you", it's simply: oh, settlement x has 300 defenders while settlement y has 500 defenders - we'll take settlement x... wait, settlement x now has more defenders... we'll take settlement y... But wait...
If you treat it like a game instead of an exploitable mechanic that must be analyzed for even more exploiting, you can interpreted it as an AI being tactical and outsmarting you.

It's a ****ing game not a ****ing analytical project. Why do people like you even play games? Just to analyze exploit and then complain about it?
 
Best answers
0
If you treat it like a game instead of an exploitable mechanic that must be analyzed for even more exploiting, you can interpreted it as an AI being tactical and outsmarting you.

It's a ****ing game not a ****ing analytical project. Why do people like you even play games? Just to analyze exploit and then complain about it?
Uhhh... It IS a game... Games are code. Depending on the code it can be complex or simple... The fief targeting for the AI in this game is simple, not complex. There aren't vastly different strategies in this regard - it's a simple numbers game based on the garrison... It's not an exploit - it's just the way the game works. I'm really confused by your vitriol.

I hope it's related to something else in your life and my statements weren't the sole trigger for you. If so, then I am sorry.... But I'd like to know:

Are you ok friend?


BTW I play games because I like them. :wink: Especially this game. :wink:
 

Dionaea

Veteran
Best answers
0
I'm tired, the baby woke up a bit too often last night, so maybe I'm easier annoyed but I don't understand how people constantly break immersion in games just treat it as code to be analyzed and exploited, especially since being exposed to this mindset has partially destroyed my own ability to be immersed in the game world
 
Best answers
0
I'm tired, the baby woke up a bit too often last night, so maybe I'm easier annoyed but I don't understand how people constantly break immersion in games just treat it as code to be analyzed and exploited, especially since being exposed to this mindset has partially destroyed my own ability to be immersed in the game world
Ahhh. I see. Misunderstandings are indeed the life-blood of strife. Personally, when I'm playing I don't think of it as code - I do immerse myself neck deep in the game (I have a ridiculous imagination). I am Ben the Bard of Vlandia, or maybe Arestios of the Empire. However, I do think about what will work and what won't - just like in life. I think about the possible reactions to my actions.

I have many, many hours in this game and when it comes to AI fief targeting there isn't really any variation. When the AI reacts the exact same way all the time, well... Then the simplicity of the code kind of stares a person right in the face.

I was just pointing out that the AI (no matter the army, no matter the culture) deploys the same strategy... Always. And if that's the case, well then, is anyone being "out played"?

But you are right - too much analysis CAN ruin things... No doubt about it friend :wink: .